Daily 21

How did Alexander create his own myth?

Alexander the Great created his own myth using his mental skill and tactics. He convinced his followers and the people that he was like one of the heroes. It may have been out of luck, or he could have had some kind of help. In a small town, they asked Alexander to untie a knot on a cart. In the town, it was fun for the townspeople to come and watch some cocky men try to untie the knot and make a fool of themselves. When Alexander the Great came to the town, he decided to try. His men were nervous. They did not want to see him try to untie this knot and lose. There are two stories about what Alexander did next. Some say he approached the cart, took out his sword, and slashed the knot, causing the entire thing the come off. The other story is the he pulled out the shaft of the cart, which made all the loose ends come out. After that, it was easy for him. This one example shows parts of the stories that followed Alexander the Great’s mythos. Also, when Alexander the Great went Siwa for an oracle from the sun god, which was like Zeus for the Egyptians. Alexander was trying to learn about his father, but the people from the temple approached him and called him the Son of God. This was creating an image for Alexander.  Alexander the Great created his own myth, not only by himself, but from the help of other. He was able to create and image and myth for himself. 

Daily 20

Could a force like Alexander the Great exist today? Why or why not?

A force like Alexander the Great could not exist today. I do not think a controlling leader like Alexander the Great could exist today because the man was so young, he went around conquering so much land. He was in complete control. I do not think, in our world today, that any country would let one person or group control that much land or territory. Although he was a great leader at that time, he also had some drinking problems. I think the people would be a little more informed and would create some kind of riot or outbreak. But today, there are dictators and leaders that are similar to Alexander the Great. I think it is possible for someone to be raised and become like Alexander the Great, but I do not believe that any outside force would allow him to have that much control or that much power. Today, we have so much technology and media that everyone would know about the control and conquests of Alexander the Great. Allies from other countries would come and try to protect some of the areas that he was trying to conquer. Some of his behavioral problems, such as drinking, would have been presented to everyone in the world through computers and television. This would change his way of thinking and may be even the outcome of his battles. The areas around him would know of his power and plans, so they could prepare and get help before he arrived. Alexander the Great type of personality could definitely exist today, but a force like him would not be nearly as successful as he was in his time. 

Daily 19

What do you think should have been done after Alexander's death?

There are many things that should have been done after Alexander the Great’s death. His death is a very difficult topic to explain because there are many different theories to how he died. They say he was drinking too much at a party and after that he had an awful fever. After this happened, no one truly knows what caused his death. Some say he had a disease, others say he had an overdose, and some say he was poisoned. But the real problem was that Alexander the Great did not leave a successor. There was a huge civil war among the Macedonians and the relationship with Persian was not in the best conditions. The Macedonian empire was spilt into four sections, but it was only a fight for power. After Alexander’s death, there was no organization or unity among the people or Macedonia. After his death, someone should have been appointed as leader. Since fighting for power was the problem, they should have chosen his best general or someone closely related to him. It would have been very difficult to try to control what was going on because of all the war and unrest. I think they could have tried to use a government system like the Athenian democracy. If we would or could change what happened after Alexander the Great’s death, then history may not have happened the way it did. We may not be here if the Macedonian Empire did not fall, to some extent. But to save many lives, I think there could have been some more organization and leadership from generals, relatives, and the military. 

Daily 18

Was Alexander the Great a "good leader"? Compare/Contrast with Pericles.

Yes, Alexander the Great was a “good leader”. Pericles was also a “good leader.” Both leaders have their pros and cons, but I think Alexander the Great was the better leader because of all the land he conquered and his accomplishments overall. I believe that Pericles was a better person, but Alexander the Great truly knew how to run his people. Alexander the Great has influenced how people function even today. He had the personality of a ruler, which he inherited from his not so great parents. In the beginning of his rule, he took away any threat to his throne or power. He stopped many revolts. Alexander the Great controlled most of the Asian Minor by the end of his rule. He had control of Syrian and most of Levant. He also conquered part of Egypt, part of Mesopotamia, and parts of Persia. Alexander was even given the name “King of Kings”. There are many different ideas for how Alexander the Great died, but he most likely had a disease, or had been poisoned, or even overdosed on medication. Alexander the Great may not have been the best man or person, but he was a great leader. He conquered so much land before he was even 32 years old. Pericles was a great leader too, leading the Athenians during the Golden Age and starting the Athenian democracy. Pericles also died from a disease. He also led his people to their death in the Battle of Sicily. The Spartans eventually conquered Athens. This was the end of Pericles’ rule and the Athenian rule. In the end, Alexander the Great was more accomplished as a ruler or leader compared to Pericles. 

Daily 17

1.  What compels someone to lead others?

Many factors and situations compel someone to lead others. Leadership can be a hereditary commitment. If a father leads his people, his son or daughter would most likely want to do the same. There are many exceptions to this factor though. If someone feels strongly about a subject or situations, they may wish to lead his or her followers because of their beliefs. For example, Martin Luther King Jr. felt very strongly about the freedom for colored people. He led many people and set a great example. Someone may be voted or chosen to lead others. They may not feel strongly for it, but feel it is their duty to lead the people. Some people do not necessarily lead for the right reasons. Some people want power, others want wealth and money. People want to lead to be in control and be “all-powerful”. There may also be a need for a leader, so someone would step up for the people. Sometimes, people just are built in character to be leaders. They may have a natural gift of leading others. This may force them, unknowingly, to lead others. If you truly feel strongly for something, you would fight for it and lead others with you. This would compel them to lead others. As Theodore Hesburgh once said, "The very essence of leadership is that you have to have a vision. It's got to be a vision you articulate clearly and forcefully on every occasion. You can't blow a weak trumpet." (http://www.legacee.com/Info/Leadership/Quotes.html) Many situations and events cause or compel others to be leaders. 

Weekly 4

Weekly 4

(Around 431 B.C., a family is living in Athens, Greece. The city is prospering and everyone is happy. Angelos is married to Iliana. They have two children, Mairi and Manos. The family is an aristocratic family. )

Iliana: Mairi! Manos! Come! It is time for dinner! Father is home.

(Mairi and Manos enter)

Mairi and Manos: Papa! (They all gather around the table to eat.)

Angelos: I have some exciting news! Pericles has chosen some new members to attend the meetings that actually make a difference to this wonderful city, and I am one of them!

Iliana: Angelos, that is great. Look children, we have our own political hero now!

Angelos: Don’t get too carried away. (Everyone laughs and the start eating dinner)

(Next is one of the democratic meetings Angelos now attends. Pericles is at the center and the men surround him. There is a lot of chatter among the men.)

Pericles: Excuse me! Men, I would like propose a plan! Everyone, I would like to start a new war! (All of the men stand up. They are angry with this decision. They are all talking to each other.)

Nikos: (Everyone settles down) Pericles! That’s ridiculous. Athens is perfect! Why would we want to start another war? We have recently recovered from the Persians. What if it doesn’t work?! What if we lose everything we have? (Some of the men start to talk the person next to them in agreement.)

Pericles: Do you even know who I plan to attack? (The men look at intently at Pericles)

1^st Man: Who could we possibly attack?

Pericles: The Spartans…

All the Men: (stand up talking to each, some in disapproval, chattering) What, I don’t believe it.

Pericles: Men, Men…Sit down. Let me explain. Sparta is our only competition. If we take the out, we will be the sole ruler of Greece. We will be the greatest empire the world has ever seen.

Angelos: Spartans are born fighters. That is all that they do. We will have no chance.

Pericles: We will have no chance by land, but we will have the advantage by sea. (All the men start to agree.) Well, if you believe we should go fight, by sea, put in your white pebble, if not put a black pebble. The men drop their stones in a vase.)

(Angelos returns home. His family is waiting for him.)

Iliana: Angelos, how did the meeting go?

Angelos: It went perfect for Pericles, but I believe we are sending our men to their death.

Iliana: What do you mean?

Angelos: They want to fight the Spartans. (Iliana, in disbelief, puts her hands to her mouth. The children, Mairi and Manos come into the room)

Mairi: Papa, how was your first meeting?

Manos: Did you get to talk to Pericles?

Angelos: It went fine and yes, I talked to Pericles…(their conversation is interrupted by a knock on the door)

Iliana: (going to answer the door) Yes, hello, how may I help you?

Nikos: I need to speak with Angelos, it is important.

Angelos: (walking towards the door) What can I do for you?

Nikos : We just got word from an outside force. The Spartans are coming for us.

Angelos: Iliana take the children somewhere safe and stay there. I need to go…(without saying anything. Angelos leaves with the Nikos)

(The Spartans have surrounded the city of Athens. They have burned their fields. The only way to receive food is through the port. Something is terribly wrong, though.)

Iliana: Mairi, my darling, what is wrong.

Mairi: (lying a bed) Mama, I do not feel well. My head is burning.

Iliana: (worried) Mairi, it is okay. It will pass. You just stay here and rest.

(Iliana goes to Angelos and Manos)

Angelos: How is she?

Iliana: Not well. It seems to be what our neighbors have. It is spreading through the city quickly.

Angelos: We can do nothing. Our only resources are lost and we are stuck.

Iliana: Oh Athena! Please help us in our time of need. Manos, come we are going to offer Athena some olives. She will be grateful. (Manos and Iliana leave. Angelos goes to see Mairi. When he sees her, he realizes she has died. He kneels beside her bed and prays.)

(Another meeting is held. Angelos, Pericles, and a smaller amount of men are there. Pericles has obviously been affected by the plague. He is sick.)

Pericles: (obviously sick) I know we are struggling, but this is not something we Athenians can’t handle.

Angelos: Pericles, please we have to try something else.

Pericles: What do you suppose we do? Surrender? I don’t think so.

Nikos: We will pray to Athena for help and keep living our lives.

Pericles: I am not feeling very well. Men, we can do this. Do not lose hope.

All Men: Yes, Pericles.

(Angelos returns home. Iliana and Manos are sharing a small piece of bread.)

Iliana: Come, sit. Have some bread.

Angelos: No, you eat. I will be fine. (Iliana gives the last piece to Manos.)

(Nikos comes running in)

Nikos: Angelos! It’s Pericles! He is dead.

(There is another meeting. There is a complete uproar. No one is under control.)

Nikos: Men, sit. We need to think of a plan and all of this arguing is not going to get us anywhere.

1^st Man: Who asked you?

2^nd Man: Yeah, since when did you become in charge?

Angelos: He was just trying to help. What are you doing to help the situation?

(Everyone starts arguing.)

Angelos: I have an idea. Everyone just listen for a minute!

(Everyone calms down.)

Angelos: Why don’t we help out Sicily?

1^st Man: Help them? We can barely help ourselves. We cannot help Sicily. They are so far away! They will be happy to see us fall to the Spartans.

Angelos: That is not true.

2^nd Man: Why Sicily?

Angelos: They are allied with Sparta. If we help them, then the Spartans will be furious.

Nikos: Yes! Exactly.

Angelos: We will go by ship and give aid or help. We can fight if we really have too.

Nikos: We can leave as soon as possible!

All the Men: (in agreement) Yes!

(Back at the home, Iliana and Manos are sitting at the table. It has been about six months.)

Manos: When will Papa be home?

Iliana: When he is done helping Sicily.

Manos: Mama, I am hungry.

Iliana: I know, I know. (A man knocks on their door. It is Pavlos, the messenger.)

Iliana: Hello! Do you have news on Angelos?!

Pavlos: Yes, but it is not good. (Iliana stumbles back to her chair at the table.) We just got news from a barber. He was trimming a man’s hair. The man was telling him a story about how the men got to Sicily and he just did not understand what happened…(Iliana starts sobbing) There  was a gruesome battle. Almost everyone died. I am sorry. Truly, I am.

(There is a sound of a mob outside the house. People are running and screaming.)

Manos: Mama, what is that?

(Iliana looks at Pavlos in confusion and is scared.)

Pavlos: That is the sound of the Spartans. We surrendered.

Iliana: Oh Athena! Protect us! (She grabs Manos, protectively.)

Pavlos: We have lost and they have won. 

Daily 16

Do you think Socrates got what he deserved? Why didn't he accept exile?

     Socrates was a philosopher, who used reason and logic. He was very interested with the mind. He questioned many, if not all, of the Athenian traditions. He loved Athens, but he loved finding the correct answer. He would ask questions and find answers about what he believed was right or wrong and what was good or bad. Socrates stood his ground. He followed what he believed to be correct and he even had information and logic to back him up. He was convicted for two things, corrupting the youth of the civilization with his “conspiracies” and “impious” acts. The impious acts were not acknowledging the Athenians gods and goddess, such as Athena and introducing new deities. Socrates was put on trial with a group of men that had recently voted for the execution of six generals. He was sentence to death by drinking a poisonous liquid. Socrates did not accept exile because he loved his city and he felt strongly for what he believed in. He would not stand down. He believed he was correct and was not going to let anyone tell him otherwise. I, personally, do not think Socrates got what he deserved because he did not deserve anything evil. He was merely standing up for what he believed in. He did not have the freedom to speak his mind. If anything, he deserved honor and acceptance. Socrates once said, “He is a man of courage who does not run away, but remains at his post and fights against the enemy.” (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/s/socrates.html). This is exactly what Socrates did. 

Daily 15

Was Athens really a 'democracy'?

     The http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=democracy defines democracy as “a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them.” In Athens, there was not a democracy until Cleisthenes. He was the ruler of Athens, but was exiled. He was eventually asked to return, but only if he formed this new form of government for the people. The Athenians had just recently stopped the Spartans and did not have a tyrant ruling. They did not want to be ruled by one person alone. Cleisthenes held a meeting and invited rich people and poor people. He instituted a simple form of voting using black and white stones. Black stones simply meant “no” while white stones meant “yes”. Someone would add up the stones for a result. This was the very beginning of the Athenian democracy. This started one of the best civilizations ever. The people were proud of this democracy and would later fight for it. Yes, Athens was really a democracy. It was the Athenian democracy, so it was not like the democracy in the United States, but it worked for the people. In the United States, people vote for others to represent them. In Athens, the people attending were voting for what they wanted. They were not technically representing any one group in particular, but there were rich and poor people and anyone could say anything. Athens was a democracy for a decent amount of time. It was an Athenian democracy that truly helped the people and gave them a reason to stay in Athens and participate in the community. 

Daily 14

Explain how the origins of theatre in Athens are tied to both religion and politics. Check out this resource.

http://ablemedia.com/ctcweb/netshots/tragedy.htm

     The origins of theatre in Athens are tied to both religion and politics. The plays were tragedies. The tragedies stressed the vulnerability of the characters. It also showed actions that were both human and divine. The theatres and the plays themselves were dedicated to the various gods and goddesses. One of the theatres was called the Theatre of Dionysus, which was dedicated to the god of wine, Dionysus. The plays were also done during a festival. The festival was a very religious ceremony. The plays in the festival were not used as business enterprises, but were funded by the Athenian people for the religious purposes. The actors also portrayed gods or goddess. The “deus ex machine” means the god from the machine. The machine was used to help actors fly to show the god or goddess more clearly.  The statement also describes the look of the god or goddess. It also had to do with the character resolving his or her problem. The last meaning was used to describe when the dramatists brought the god or goddess at the end of the play to resolve the problems. There were also sacrificed during and for the play. The sacrifices were usually oxen for the gods or goddess. Some of the stories such as Phrixos, “sacrifice” a ram with a golden fleece. The actors were paid by the state. Women were also not allowed to participate in the tragedies. The men wore masks that hid their faces, so the audience would not know the difference.

Daily 13

Please read http://ow.ly/156BA and write a blog post comparing the Ancient Greek Olympics to the Games this coming weekend!

                The Ancient Greek Olympics had many similarities and difference compared to our common Olympic Games. The Greeks’ dedicated the games to Zeus. They sacrificed oxen and gave the games a religious importance. The common Olympic Games do not have a religious significance. The Greeks considered the games to be connected to military training. The great runners were considered perfect soldiers. The common Olympics have no military significance. They are a test for talent in a sport. The first events the Greeks participated in were running, then boxing, wrestling, and pancration, which is a combination of the events. They later added pentathlon, chariot racing, and equestrian events. The Olympics today have many more games. We also have sports teams. The games in Greece were not team games, they were individual games. The individuals who won were considered heroes. They would represent their town with pride. This is very similar to the athletes today. The athletes would earn a wreath and money in Ancient Greece. Winners today earn a medal. They have their national anthem played and earn a lot of pride. In the Greek games, cheating was not tolerated at all. This is the same for the Olympics today. The Greeks tried not to involve politics but they did not succeed. Politics are not directly involved in the Olympics, but they have an indirect component. Poets wrote odes and poems for the games as entertainment. Today, there are opening and closing ceremonies, people sing and dance, and the countries are represent through their national anthems and songs. The Greeks also competed naked. Today, that is not the case. Women and men were separated. Most married women did not attend the games. They had their own games devoted to Hera. Unmarried women may have attended in search for a husband. Today, the Olympic Games are divided into men and women categories but they are done at the same time, in generally the same place. Men do not go up against women or vice versa. Some people in Ancient Greece were not fans of the games. They believed the athletes were harming their bodies because of the eating, sleeping, and training habits. People and doctors today are concerned with the athletes’ habits and many are checked for steroids or other drugs to enhance their playing abilities. The Olympic Games, in both Ancient Greece and today, are similar and different in their own unique ways. 

Megalith at JC Weekly With Amanda and Emily

*By Lindsay 

*By Amanda 

The top standing stone was placed by Archbishop John Carroll himself to show the location where he wanted the school to be built.  On the middle stone in Latin, it says “Scientia potenta est.” which means knowledge is the ability to do things. This became the entrance to the school.  The picture on the bottom shows where Eleanor Darnall, his mother, was buried. There are some folk tales to these stones as well. Some teachers say that when the students did not do their homework, the principle would turn them into stone and add it to the burial grounds.  Teachers say that whenever a student fails a quarter, they have to add a rock to the circle.  Other people say that if you stand in the stone circle in top picture and read the Latin, you will be blessed with knowledge.  In the beginning of every year, the classes all gather and recite the Latin together.  Twenty years ago, the school decided not to go and recite the Latin because they believed that is was some silly story.  Only 50% of the seniors graduated that year.  So ever since then, the school goes together to recite the old saying

The stones are from http://www.powernatureessences.com/picturesofscotland.htm

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g186563-d198875-Reviews-Standing_Stones_of_Stenness-Orkney_Islands_Scotland.html

Daily 12

2. Give several examples of monuments in Maryland / DC / PA that might be familiar to folks who live here but which would not be understood by outsiders without an explanation. Please include your own or public domain photos.

There are many examples of monuments in Maryland, D.C., and PA that are familiar to folks who live here but would not be understood by outsiders without and explanation. For example, in Baltimore between Camden Yards, the baseball stadium, and M&T Bank Stadium, the football stadium, is a monument dedicated to war veterans. This memorial was originally on the front the old Orioles and Colts Stadium. The stadiums moved from this location to Camden Yards and M&T Bank Stadium. “Outsiders” would not understand the significance of the monument or the origin because it was an old Baltimore landmark. Another example is the numbers outside Camden Yards. There is a number “5” and a number “8”, which are dedicated to Brooks Robinson and Cal Ripken Jr., who are two of the most famous Baltimore baseball players ever. People know that they are great players, but only Baltimoreans know the importance and influence these players and their numbers had on their community. In Havre de Grace, Maryland, there is a monument dedicated to General Lafayette. Most people know that he was an important general in the Revolutionary War, but outsiders would not know the importance he had on this town. When he visited he loved the town, eventually giving it its name, which literally means Harbor of Grace in French. There are many more examples of monuments that only people who lived in Maryland, D.C, or Pennsylvania would understand.These monuments mean a lot to the people who live there, without them there would not be much of a history. 

 Lafayette in Havre de Grace, Maryland From:http://wn.com/lafayette_havre_de_grace (public domain photo)

Daily 11

     What is the oldest human-created artifact that has mattered to you? Why/how does it matter? (from @butwait on Twitter)

One of the oldest human-created artifacts that has mattered to me is papyrus. Papyrus was created by the Egyptians. It was their form of paper and writing. It was discovered in the third millennium B.C.E. Papyrus matters to me because, without it we would not have paper, not in the way we have it today. I use paper for almost everything I do. My ways are beginning to change because I have a laptop, but I used to draw on paper, I made projects out of paper, and I write all my homework on paper. I love sending letters to friends and family members and without paper I would not be able to write to them, or have the idea to write to them. I receive important things in the mail that is on paper, such as report cards, magazines, and letters. I also love to read. Without paper, there would be no books. If I did not have books, I would have too much free time. I also use books in school. Without text books or the books we learn from, we would not have a basis of learning. For example, we could not find extra math problems without having to come up with them on our own or read a book in English and write a report about it. Slowly, our community is switching to paperless ways. Without papyrus and paper, I personally do not believe we would have computers because it is how communication and writing started. The oldest human-created artifact that has mattered to me is papyrus. 

Daily 10

"Structures, both social and physical are continually improving." agree or disagree (from @thecorcoran)

     Personally, I believe the physical or social structures, are improving, but I do not think they are always perfect or always the best. Some physical structures, such as the common house, a barn, or a stadium have definitely improved and are continuing to improve. Homes and barns are being built with a better structure to prevent them from collapsing during an earthquake. Homes also have solar panels to create electricity for the home. Stadiums have lights, a group of people to clean them, sound systems, and other high performance technology. Physical structures such as the pyramids have not improved. If anything they have deteriorated because of weather or age.  Social structures like social classes have improved to some extent. One example, there are no longer slaves, but in certain countries there is an extremely poor class that barely stays alive. In social structure, such as the difference between men and women, has improved. Women are treated much more fairly then men. This is the same with people of other races. Most of these social structures have not changed in countries. In the United States, all of the rules come in to play, but in places such as the Middle East and parts of Africa, equality is not as prevalent. Social structures in government, have improved. In the United States we have a president, legislators, governors, judges, majors, etc. Many people would argue over their improvement, but it has improved since the time of small civilizations and communities with no leader in control. In general, I would agree that both social and physical structures are improving. 

Daily 9

"War is a form of technology". Agree or Disagree.

I agree that war is a form of technology. Technology is the practical application of science to commerce. As humans, we create and use technology. We also create war. War drives technology to be created, improved, and changed. Without war, we would not have improved or changed forms of technology. For example, if group A and group B got into a war and B won because they had hand held weapons, then A would have to come up with a new plan and try to come back. They would also need to know what weapons and tactics to use. Since group B had the hand held weapons, group A would have to try to attack from far away. So, group A builds a simple type of catapults. Now, when group A attacks they have a better chance of winning. Group A also has a new form of technology or weapons to attack other civilizations that are not prepared for the catapults. Another example, Group A decides to attack group C with their catapults. Group A’s catapults fire stones a few yards. Group C loses the battle, but they now have an idea about how to build a new form of technology. They can build a bigger and better catapult the throws boulders several hundred yards. Throughout history and even today, war is a form of technology. Civilizations and communities have created, improved, and changed forms of technology for war.  So, yes, I agree war is a form of technology advancing every civilization. 

Weekly Assignment

Weekly Assignment

Question: Is 'Change' a Good Thing or a Bad Thing? (Relate to the origins of art, the agricultural revolution, architecture and urban planning in Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley).

                Change is an overall good thing. There are many examples of good change that can be related to the origins of art, the agricultural revolution, and architecture and urban planning in Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley. Many great changes happened during the Paleolithic age, Mesolithic age, and the Neolithic age. During most of this time, mankind was learning new techniques to make living easier. They changed farming habits and social habits. Without these changes, humans would not have the necessities they have today.

                In art, change is a good thing. Art is important for understanding human behaviors. Some paintings, sculptures, engravings, and eventually pottery show what was happening in the social systems, some spiritual concepts, and the peoples’ way to find food. As this art changed so did the way of living. This was depicted in the art. Colors were also of importance. Some of the easier colors to use were yellow, brown, red, and black. White was a little less common. As time went on and tools changed, the colors in the paintings changed as well. This gave people today a better understanding of what was really happening at the time and what the surroundings or objects truly looked like. Some of the first art is the cave are in the Lascaux Caves. This had the basic colors. Cave art consists of the basics: human figures, animals, tools and weapons, simple local maps, and symbols. Art changed for the better; all these basics became more complex and more intense in later times.

                The agriculture changed for the better as well. The agricultural revolutions started in the Neolithic Age. Farming was the first started when a few people, by accident, dropped some seeds on the ground. The seeds later grew and the people took the idea and started growing crops. Irrigation, invented in Mesopotamia, was a drastic change for the people. It increased the food supply and watered the land. Farmers were eventually growing grain, fruits, and vegetables. The next step was domesticated animals. Then the farmers used wooden plows pulled by oxen. This was an easier and faster way of farming. The people dealt with a great deal of problems though. Temperature change was a big problem. The farmers had to cope with the changes for growing their crops. The only animals that survived were the one that could stand the severe weather. The people learned all of the new techniques through trial and error, but agriculture changed for the better with this process.

                In Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley, architecture and urban planning changed for the better. In Mesopotamia there was an Ubaid period, which was when urban societies were created. Through changes, this area became known as Iraq. With change and development of Mesopotamia, it eventually became one of the best and socially complex areas. Some of these areas became incredible cities, such as Uruk and Nippur. There were four civilizations were writing was first invented. In the Indus Valley, there was great change too. It covered almost 1.25 kilometers of land. The buildings were made of brick and stone, which was a great, new change. The area had a drainage system, wells and water storage, and developed systems of weights and trade.  The people made jewelry, game pieces, and toys. Things were definitely changing for the better. The people would learn more advance ways of art and ways to layout their city, the most important city being Harappan. Historians are able to look back at the structures and objects to learn more about the people.

                In these examples, the people, the art, and the agriculture change. All of these changes leave the people in a better situation then they were previously in. The changes the people of Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley went through create positions for people in the future to change positively as well. Change is not always the best thing, but in this situation, it was great thing. The people survived, art progressed, and agriculture improved. Because the people survived something must have changed in a positive way. Art has changed and proved that life did become better. Agriculture improved because farmers found a way to use fruits, vegetables, and livestock. Change is a great thing, especially in the art, agriculture, and the planning in Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley.

Sources:

http://www.ancientindia.co.uk/indus/home_set.html 

http://www.arthistoryarchive.com/arthistory/prehistoricart/

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/81385/prehistoric_agriculture_a_brief_overview_pg2.html?cat=32

http://best.berkeley.edu/~mesa/comm/group_1/louis.html

Daily 8

Describe the importance of water in the ancient world.

Water was very important to the ancient world. Of course, it was used as something to drink, but it was also used for irrigation. Irrigation was used to water the fields. They built canals that helped when the area flooded. The irrigation system also increased the food supply.  The water was also used in farming, which created a clean fertile land that was fit to grow fruits and vegetables. The towns and civilizations that lived on a riverside were better off than the other groups of people. All of the towns, eventually built wells to supply them with water. In Mesopotamia, the two rivers, the Tigris and the Euphrates, were the most important parts of the area. Every person living in Mesopotamia centered their life on these rivers. In a desert land, water is the best and most important natural resource. The rivers and the oceans also held fish and other marine animals for the people to eat. The land in Mesopotamia was very low, so the area flooded in certain times of the years, while other times it was dried out. The water also created jobs for the people because they needed people to farm, build dam like structures, and work on the irrigation system. Another important river was the Nile. The Egyptians also used a form of irrigation that is still used, in part, today. Most of the time, there was enough rain water to help the areas grow crops, but they had the problem of storing the water. Too much of the salt water was also a problem. That is why the rivers and the rain were so important. Water was essential to the productivity and lifestyle of the ancient world. 

Language with Emily Daily 7

This is the language Emily and I have made up. 

Yes..sey

No...kah

Food ...um

Water...la

Shelter...dum

Light...rash

Dark...har

You...tik

Me...ap

It...za

Us...tik set ap

And...set

Bad...ha

Good...fan

Hurt...ug

Happy...awahl

Angry...uh

Sleep...zee

Eat ...mmm

Drink...sippy

Go...shwosh

Run ...awug

bathroom...fush

Daily 6

Which do you think is a better roadmap of history artifacts of the humanities (art, music, dance, theatre, literature, philosophy, architecture, etc) or political/military conflicts? Why? (from Twitter)

The better roadmap of history artifacts are the humanities, such as the arts, literature, architecture, etc.. Without the arts, we would not understand the culture of the people. Without literature, we would not have records of what was happening during the specific point in history. Art, music, dance, and theatre are used as a business and for entertainment. If we did not know about them or understand them, we would not be aware of any writing or objects. The architecture of a time period explains history. For example, during the time of Constantine, he built arches every time he won a battle. Each arch explained about the battle and what happened. This explained the military conflicts. Political and military conflicts are important roadmaps of history artifacts, as well, but they are not better. Most political and military conflicts are recorded in architecture, like Constantine’s arches, or in books and art. The Bible is a roadmap of history. It explains many battles, but in a broader view, it shows a culture. In buildings the art and architecture explain history very well. Some of the most important times in history like the Renaissance, were based on the arts. Political or military conflicts would not describe the impressive accomplishments at this time. Political and military conflicts are a small subject to use as a roadmap. The arts, literature, philosophy, architecture, etc. are a much broader topic. This can explain history and set up a “roadmap” for people to follow and better understand the culture and history artifacts.